this post was submitted on 25 Aug 2023
93 points (95.1% liked)

World News

32326 readers
563 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] CmdrShepard@lemmy.one -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What are your intentions behind doing this in your hypothetical scenario?

[–] IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

To find out where people are willing to draw the line. I've noticed that the people defending this proposed law are giving this question a wide berth.

[–] CmdrShepard@lemmy.one 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm asking what your intentions are behind drawing on a whiteboard outside a mosque in the scenario not what your intentions were behind posing this hypothetical scenario. That part is obvious.

[–] IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The intention isn’t relevant.

[–] CmdrShepard@lemmy.one 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sure it is. Intent is what separates murder from manslaughter for instance. Intent definitely matters here. Why are you having trouble elaborating on that aspect of your hypothetical scenario.

[–] IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Fine, two scenarios: first, I’m doing it because I’m Islamophobic. Second, I’m doing it to test the limits of free speech. Can you tell the difference? No. That’s why it’s not relevant.

[–] CmdrShepard@lemmy.one 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You don't see the difference between these two scenarios? It may benefit you to learn about nuance.

[–] IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It may benefit you to pay attention to what I'm saying. Could you tell the difference?

[–] CmdrShepard@lemmy.one 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What you're saying here doesn't make any sense. What you said previously made sense but lacked nuance or any deeper understanding of the situation you proposed yourself.

Perhaps you think blatant, ignorant bigotry and "testing freedom of speech" are the same thing, which explains your response, and shows you the reasoning behind mine.

[–] IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Oh boy. No, I don't think they are the "same thing" I'm saying you can't infer motivation just by observing therefore the motivation isn't relevant. Try and keep up, or don't.

[–] CmdrShepard@lemmy.one 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You're discussing the law and being arrested. Intent absolutely matters in this context which is why I brought up other examples of where intent matters as murder/manslaughter, hate crimes, assault versus self defense, etc. You seem quite confused about a topic that you brought up on your own...

[–] IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You're not thinking clearly. Intent is irrelevant, it can't be known in this example. Got it?

Just in case, here it is again. Intent is irrelevant.

[–] CmdrShepard@lemmy.one 1 points 1 year ago

But you defined the intent in your previous comment and laws/courts take intent into account when determining whether they've been violated or not.

If it can't be known then your entire question/scenario is irrelevant and pointless because it could never apply to the real world. For someone who keeps talking about confusion and not following the conversation, you seem to lack even a basic understanding of what's being talked about.